[Federal Register: August 10, 2004 (Volume 69, Number 153)]
[Notices]
[Page 48526]
From the Federal Register Online via GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov]
[DOCID:fr10au04-131]
[[Page 48526]]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF LABOR
Employment and Training Administration
[TA-W-53,209]
Computer Sciences Corporation, Finanial Services Group, East
Hartford, Connecticut; Notice of Negative Determination on
Reconsideration on Remand
The United States Court of International Trade (USCIT) granted the
Secretary of Labor's motion for a voluntary remand for further
investigation in Former Employees of Computer Sciences Corporation v.
Elaine Chao, U.S. Secretary of Labor, No. 04-00149.
The Department's initial negative determination for the workers of
Computer Sciences Corporation, Financial Services Group, East Hartford,
Connecticut (hereafter ``CSC'') was issued on October 24, 2003 and
published in the Federal Register on November 28, 2003 (68 FR 66878).
The Department's determination was based on the finding that workers
did not produce an article within the meaning of Section 222 of the
Trade Act of 1974. It was determined that the subject worker group were
not engaged in the production of an article, but provided business and
information consulting, specialized application software, and
technology outsourcing support to customers in the financial services
industry.
By letter of November 24, 2003, the petitioner requested
administrative reconsideration of the Department's negative
determination. The Department issued a Notice of Affirmative
Determination Regarding Application for Reconsideration on January 5,
2004. The determination Notice was published in the Federal Register on
January 23, 2004 (69 FR 3391).
The Department's Notice of Negative Determination on
Reconsideration was issued on February 3, 2004 and published in the
Federal Register on February 24, 2004 (69 FR 8488). On reconsideration,
the Department determined that the workers produced widely marketed
software components on CD Rom and tapes but were not eligible to apply
for Trade Adjustment Assistance (TAA) because the subject company did
not import completed software on physical media that is like or
directly competitive with that which was produced at the subject
facility and did not shift abroad functions performed at the subject
facility.
In his letter to the Court, the petitioner infers that packaging
functions (storing completed software on physical media and making a
tape copy of the completed software on physical media) had shifted to
India. The Department requested, and was granted, a voluntary remand.
On June 2, 2004, the Court ordered that the Department further
investigate the matter and determine whether the subject worker group
is eligible for certification for worker adjustment assistance
benefits.
As part of the remand investigation, the Department reviewed
previously submitted information and contacted the subject company
officials to determine the process in which software code is fixed onto
tangible media, identify which functions were shifted to India, and
determine whether the subject worker group meets the statutory criteria
for TAA certification.
In response to the Department's inquiries regarding CSC's software
delivery processes, the company official stated that the software is
copied from a central computer system onto physical media. When the
software is ordered by a customer, a copy is made at the subject
facility and delivered to the customer. Delivery of the software could
be a CSC employee physically bringing the physical media and
instruction materials to the customer from the subject facility, a
customer physically picking up the physical media and instruction
materials from the subject facility, or sending an electronic message
to the customer with the software and instruction materials attached.
During the remand investigation, the Department found that no
``packaging'' functions were shifted to India, as asserted by the
petitioner. The investigation revealed that the storing of the
completed software onto physical media, the copying of the completed
software onto physical media, and the delivery of the software continue
to take place at the subject facility.
To determine the workers' TAA eligibility, the Department inquired
into CSC's production, sales, and import levels during the relevant
time period, determined whether there was a shift of production abroad,
and investigated whether increased imports of completed software like
or directly competitive with those produced at the subject facility
contributed importantly to the workers' separations.
In response to the Department's inquiries, CSC submitted sales and
production figures for the software produced at the subject facility
during the relevant period (2002 and 2003). An examination of the
submission shows increased sales in three lines of software and
declines in a fourth line of software. To clarify this matter, the
Department sought an explanation from the subject company. The
Department was repeatedly informed that during the period of sales
decline, CSC was enhancing that particular line of software and decided
not to market it while it was being enhanced; and that while the
existing version was available for purchase, most customers decided to
wait until the new version was released because any enhancements would
have to be separately purchased later to make it perform as well as the
newly released version.
As previously discussed, the Department determined that there was
no shift of production abroad by the subject company during the
relevant period.
According to the company official, CSC does not import any
completed software which is like or directly competitive with those
produced at the subject facility which experienced sales declines
during the relevant time period.
Conclusion
After reconsideration on remand, I affirm the original notice of
negative determination of eligibility to apply for adjustment
assistance for workers and former workers of Computer Sciences
Corporation, Financial Services Group, East Hartford, Connecticut.
Signed at Washington, DC this 29th day of July 2004.
Elliott S. Kushner,
Certifying Officer, Division of Trade Adjustment Assistance.
[FR Doc. 04-18237 Filed 8-9-04; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4510-30-P